Energy-Motion in the form of Vibration...Vibrations differ from Vibrational Frequency.

Frequency-"Frequency is the number of occurrences of a repeating event per unit time. It is also referred to as temporal frequency. The period is the duration of one cycle in a repeating event, so the period is the reciprocal of the frequency."

Did you mean that "Good" and "Bad" are inherent parts of humans or that "Hatred" and "Love" are?

Love and Hatred are both inherent parts of humans...but only if we believe or aknowledge this to our consciousness and subconsciouseness.The universe does not define Love or Hatred and therefore they are both energy(well it is energy either way actually).Love and Hatred aren't both inherent parts of humans if we believe it not to be...the immutable universal law of polarity is "inherent part of humans"(atleast in our universe)...the energy itself is always neutral,but it is up to us to choose and personalize the 2 sides that is "positive(good)" or "negative(bad)".It is hard to even imagine how can Hatred and Love not be different sides of polarity if our consciouseness and subcounsciouseness has been "trained" that way for all these years.But it definetly isn't "impossible".We can constantly choose and believe what is "good" to us and what is "bad" to us if we put enough "power" into it.So if people would define Hatred as good and Love as good then these 2 would not be different polarities with each other.

And no...it is absolutely not "Impossible" to have only Unconditional Love on earth...it is possible,but not permanently.It is completely Ignorant to think that there is no possibility that "Hatred" and "Love" does not "exist" in any other "cililizations" on other planets or galaxies...and therefore it is completely Ignorant to think that earth and humans are balanced only with theirselves and not with every other cililization throughout the universe.

Oh and my primary goal was to share my opinions on Jesus' "teachings" and that who Jesus and god God actually are.

So you absolutely and completely failed if you thought my intention was to influence anyone to think that "Unconditional Love" is the way everyone should go.

And my opinion on Christianity and Satanism.And yes...My Opinion so I hope that noone will lose their head starting to write every crap they can think of to bash me.Prove yourself that you have strong enough discpipline to control yourself not to get emotionally influenced by my Opinion.

Both aknowledge the existence of "Good" and "Evil"

Satanism sets pressure on "importance of Self" while Christianity sets pressure on "importance of Others".

While both basicly fail to understand that both of these are equally important,and neither of these "Religions" is willing to compromise.

I'm rather the balance itself than one of the polarities that makes the balance.

And of course,I'm not telling that it is necessary to find a compromise,everyone in the universe acts on their free will and has their own reality...so "universally" none of us is "right" or "wrong".

**Fix from my previous post: "It is completely Ignorant to think that there is no possibility that "Hatred" and "Love" Exists..."

First off: as a newb here it is suggested to keep your head low and not start spamming boards with psychedelic crap or other shit you come up with. Posting your opinion means opening yourself to critics, and they will be given wether you like it or not.

Quote:

Satanism sets pressure on "importance of Self" while Christianity sets pressure on "importance of Others".

While both basicly fail to understand that both of these are equally important,and neither of these "Religions" is willing to compromise.

I may conclude you think Satanism and Christianity is a war of "we agains them"? It isn't, within Satanism a person is considered to think for himself, deal with reality etc.. Not going to repeat the whole "what Satanism stands for /is" since you can read it in the media section and on various topics if you take your time.

Take my advice: keep your stupid mouth shut if you don't know what you are talking about. Start reading the diverse topics on the board, learn and see if you fit in. If not leave.. spare us some time to have a decent discussion without the brainless ramblings from ignorant bastards like you. Show respect to the administrator who is paying to keep this site up and to endure dumbasses who completely ruin topics whom are/were worthwhile to read.

"within Satanism a person is considered to think for himself, deal with reality etc.."

Haha...but dude,you just comfirmed excactly what I said.I said Satanism puts more pressure on "importance of Self"...and you comfirmed,and I can also read out from your sentence that you think that "importance of Self" is somehow more "reality" than "importance of Others" is,and again you excactly comfirmed that you are not willing to compromise in any way.I think you people are so used with agreeing each other about "truth" and "Satanism" that you have become Lazy Minded,so when your ideological way of "truth" becomes under threat you will get emotionally extremely influenced and not even taking in consideration of what I said or was trying to say.And yes,I do expect my "opinions" to get critisized but in more civilized manner :D.

And I have no idea that how can you say that I am brainless and don't know what I'm talking about...I think I know Excactly what I am talking about :D.I'm not the follower or prisoner of any Religion and morality,you are...And the only one who is clearly and and purposely intening to offend anyone here is you,not me.

But no worries,I've lost any interest pacticipating in discussions at this forum since I think that you're not the only person like that in here :D...so byez!

You're attempting to boil down the complex religion of Christianity into a "Think about others" statement and the complex philosophy of Satanism into a "Think about yourself" statement and then arguing against the dichotomy. It's a perfect example of a Straw Man Fallacy.

If you expect to be taken seriously on this forum, contribute something intelligent, not crap like this.

_________________________If you can't practice what you preach, at least have the decency to preach what you practice

Whilst I dont agree with this Isolation person fully and dont like a few of his ideas, I would take his side against most of you due to the fact this isnt a personal ad hominim discussion. We are discussing ideas so stop being uncivilised and attack his ideas rather than him as an individual. I do think that you can boil down the two philosophies to others and self because that is generally what it is, but self seems more reality of someone, as in the inescapable selfishness.

Anyways, I basically think you were all being a bit harsh on someone who is participating in a discussion and expecting intelligent argument back, which rather you simply provided an argument decorated with a bunch of unnecessary insults. I assume this is a philosophical forum and not a personal one.

If you put my argument back into context: The possibility that Jesus was fictitious and made up by people at the time, well there werent many stories based on nothing back then. Most were legends based on true events or facts. Or they were short stories to tell a moral lesson, so you cannot say that this complete record was written by peasantry that barely knew how to write let alone think up a complete record of a persons life.

I dont disclude the possibility that jesus was fictitious I simply think that there is more evidence for his existence than against. I dont think this level of mentality to create an entire person+complete record of life was existent at the time of jesus

For starters, nobody is entitled to be treated well or respected just because they happen to post here. If someone gets a rough time of it here it is generally because they are an idiot, and stupidity just doesn't fly here. (At least not for very long. When did you sign up again? )

Respect is earned or not given at all. Courtesy, though a default, lasts only so long as it is deserved. If you learn nothing of Satanism in your time here but for this you have still learned something critical to the philosophy. (not that I have much faith in this sinking in to that thick skull of yours)

And again onto the subject of 'jesus', and the claim that records exist of his life..I ask...where and what do you believe these records to be?Do you have any clue whatsoever when the gospels were written? Here's a hint for you..well AFTER the letters of paul were. 80 years and upwards to 400 years after he would have supposedly lived.The paulian epistles never outright speak of jesus as a mortal man, because that mythology came much later. The NT is structured to make one think the gospels came first, but they sure didn't.

Why is it do you think that there are no contemporary historical or archeological records of this jesus fellow? If he did even a fraction of the things attributed to him, surely at least one historian might have made so much as a footnote demarcating those events? Well there isn't. Not one iota of contemporary evidence.

All we have are the gospels, written generations after the fact, that are actually copy's of each other. Do you think 'luke' was written by a guy named luke? 'john' by a guy named john? no, these were attributed to these 'authors' (of which there is also no historical or archeological evidence) much later, and by christian scribes.

So then, my intellectually diminutive co-board inhabitant, it's time to put up or shut up. Where is this evidence of jesus you keep blathering on about?

Daniel, to answer your question and give further information on my own previous posting, there exists a record in Pontious Pilates's annals that mention a man called Yeshua Ben Shlomo, a rabbl-rouser and dissident who was brought before Pontious and being scourged before being set free. No crucifixion, no son of joseph, no crown of thorns. Just a rebel the authorities thought was mad. The records were brought back to Rome shortly after Pilate was recalled for gross misconduct.

Dan, if we are going to accept the fact that the Yeshua (jesus) of The New testament is a defacto compilation of religious and cultural mythologies, does it not go to complete the picture that somewhere, at it's core, was a real person, however humanly eccentric? I do. And i think that this person contributed a great deal of the Xtian philosophy, but also had a bug up his ass the size of New York against the religious authorities. They knew that, thought the man mad, and treated him accordingly.

I was simply saying that in being ridiculously rude and offensive to people who may have ideas that arent ours or are simply idiotic one is becoming as bad as he christian. Opening part of the Satanic Bible talks about Satan as the gentleman against his accusers, i think following that example as many Satanists neglect, would give us all a better appearance than the typical aggressive people most of the public see, and the arrogance that is the CoS.

Add-in: I never said he was entitled to respect but we arent here to talk about who we all are. We throw out an idea and it is argued, simple as that. Dont start making it personal everytime someone has an Idea you dont like. You argue it away with your own views. And you emphasize my point by saying Im ignorant. I expect you to think more in the future about whether you want to debate ideas or simply go insult people and then add-on half-assed ideas onto them.

Asides, you seem very much emphasized on these gospels. You obviously forget that these gospels werent just thought up in the bloody middle ages by some englishmen. It was translated from ancient hebrew and whilst much of it may have been mistranslated and misunderstood it doesnt change the fact it was BASED on the original and so it is second hand evidence based on first hand evidence of jesus life.

As for the names John and Paul etc. Well where did the names come to be common today. I dont see what your point there is because John and Paul might be names of hebrew origin.

I wont disclude Jesus being fictitious but even if he is (not my belief) his philosophy remains and that is the more important point. You may even refer to the author of Jesus life as Jesus himself.

Also all these 'theories' of jesus being fake well there are theories the holocaust never happened, 9/11 is a conspiracy, there is a moon base on the moon, moon landing never happened, and other theories people think up because they cant accept something or want to make some money or whatever. In the end we cant prove or disprove jesus' existence but lean closer to the truth via evidence.

I think the society of the time wouldnt have the literary standards to sprout a complete fictitious record of someones life because of that and its not really in character of the society to write for fun and entertainment. (and we are talking original hebrew and not gospels)

"Also all these 'theories' of jesus being fake well there are theories the holocaust never happened, 9/11 is a conspiracy, there is a moon base on the moon, moon landing never happened, and other theories people think up because they cant accept something or want to make some money or whatever. In the end we cant prove or disprove jesus' existence but lean closer to the truth via evidence."

Evidence being the key word here. As such, you just have a theory, and your theory Jesus was a real person, and the stuff written about him being true, just doesn't fly. If you believe him to be true, and the stories about him are true, then why are you here? Just to be clear, if you think the guy walked on water, and was the son of god, maybe you are in the wrong place?

"I think the society of the time wouldnt have the literary standards to sprout a complete fictitious record of someones life because of that and its not really in character of the society to write for fun and entertainment. (and we are talking original hebrew and not gospels)"

Lets see and ponder that period of time....No television, cameras, telephones, electrical devices. No computers, no standard mail delivery, no radios.Most people can not read, write, or afford to go to any type of school, unless they are part of a "priest/religious" order that teaches it.

You only have the verbal storytelling traditions that is available to the masses of society. When telling a story, things get changed, stretched out, exgaurated, and made up. Over time something simple can become extreme. When stories are years later written down, and then centuries later changed and codified, they are far from the original tales.

Morgan

_________________________
Courage Conquering Fear Fuck em if they can't take a jokeDon't Like What I Say, Kiss My Ass